AndrevanTonder wrote:
> I would still object if I have to include it in all those applications
> that I don't intend to run as Unix scripts (i.e., all my applications).
> If, on the other hand, I don't have to include it to produce a
> well-formed program, then it has no business being in r6rs, so in that
> case I would also object to it.
I think it is useful that it be possible to write a conforming R6RS
program that is at the same time a valid Unix/Posix script. That
requires some minimal standardization in R6RS. Non-Unix implementations
need to not get confused by a Unix script header.
It is also useful to have a standard header so a Scheme file can be
identified by content, rather than just file extension, which is
unreliable. But that requires a standard header for libraries as well,
though it need not and probably should not be the same header.
--
--Per Bothner
per_at_bothner.com http://per.bothner.com/
Received on Thu Nov 16 2006 - 11:38:10 UTC